To sell or not to sell America!

Since we are outsourcing jobs and now giving up the security of out national ports whats next. Bush is a friggin idiot. This cannot come to pass our forefathers did not intend for foreign nations to run the security of our nation. We might as well sell out to the British and let them control us like back in the day.

wxcrazytwo said:

Since we are outsourcing jobs and now giving up the security of out national ports whats next. Bush is a friggin idiot. This cannot come to pass our forefathers did not intend for foreign nations to run the security of our nation. We might as well sell out to the British and let them control us like back in the day.

Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, I'm not exactly for the UAE running our ports. The jury is still out with me although I am leaning against it simply out of fear and mistrust of foreign accountability (especially Middle East countries.) But I think that maybe the Arabs may feel much like the poster above when it comes to them outsourcing a great deal of their oilfield control to American companies such as Halliburton, Schlumberger, and Brown and Root/Kellogg.

We really need to tread lightly on this issue and not overreact until all the evidence is put out on the table. Let's leave the over-reaction to the Arabs, shall we?

wxcrazytwo said:

Since we are outsourcing jobs and now giving up the security of out national ports whats next. Bush is a friggin idiot. This cannot come to pass our forefathers did not intend for foreign nations to run the security of our nation. We might as well sell out to the British and let them control us like back in the day.

Click to expand...

***Sell out to the British? Those ports in question are already solely owned by the British.

wxcrazytwo said:

Since we are outsourcing jobs and now giving up the security of out national ports whats next. Bush is a friggin idiot. This cannot come to pass our forefathers did not intend for foreign nations to run the security of our nation. We might as well sell out to the British and let them control us like back in the day.

Click to expand...

The IGNORANCE of some people never ceases to amaze me!

Do me a favor, wxcrazytwo, before posting any more stupid remarks like this one, do some reaearch and listen to some REAL experts 1st - it will save you from looking like an idiot and save us all from having to endure such intelligence draining, mind-numbing dribble!

BUSH is not out-sourcing jobs OR our national security!

80% of ports in Los Angeles, California are now, and have been, under the control/'ownership' of foreign companies for quite some time now. Yet, there has been NO public outcry about it until now.

40% of U.S. ports are already, and have been for sme time now, under the control of foreign countries! Yet, there has been NO public outcry about it until now.

Foreign countries who currently 'own' the operations of U.S. Ports include the U.K., Singapore, and China!

On average, 65 such deals regarding the 'sale' of U.S. port operations occur EVERY YEAR in the U.S. - all without scrutiny or mass hysteria!

The selling of the port operations is like buying and selling stock. Big wigs at the top buy and sell the rights to make money - just like in stock sales, just because there is a new owner of the stock doesn't mean the product changes!
- The same guys working on the docks and running the show will CONTINUE to keep their jobs, and there will be almost NO visible difference in operations once (and IF) the UAE takes over! EVERY expert on dock operations who have been working with the business for years has verified this and can not understand why everyone is so up in arms about the UAE buying the company/contract from the UK.

Bush is not 'out-sourcing' jobs or our security! As I said, the AMERICANS who are working there now aren't going anywhere! The U.S. Coast Guard, Border Patrol, and Customs will CONTINUE to provide the security, just as they have when the UK Company ran the company/contract - the UAE will have NO SAY or influence in the security!

Next Argument: The UAE used to launder money for terrorists and may have been linked to Bin laden.
- The UAE is now one of our largest friends in the war on terror. They were the 1st to allow OUR Cutoms agents to check cargo containers PRIOR to shipment to the U.S. They allow us to fly aircraft out of their country in the war on terror. They allow our navy ships to dock in their ports, and they provide the security (part of it) for those bases and ships! If you want to say because they had some bad guys in their country that should disqualify them from this deal, then we have to disqualify ourselves based on Timmy McV, the American Taliban found in Afghanistan, the U.S. Muslim soldier who threw a grenade into his comanders' tent, etc. We have had bad guys, too!

We NEED friends in the Middle East, and to stop this deal would be to insult and offend a critical friend in the war on terror.

The security checks have been done, and no risk has been found in this deal.

BTW, if the deal to sell the UAE the company, the Britt's next option is to sell it to the Chinese, who already have been managing several of our ports. What about the Chinese buying missile technology from Clinton that has enabled them to finally reach our nation with their NUKES?! China is the #1 country engaged in espionage against this country! No one is screaming about them running a large number of our ports!

THIS is not a security risk/issue -- all the exerts have been saying this the last few days. THIS is a POLITICAL issue!

And the MYTH that Bush, who is NOT brokering the deal for this and has nothing to gain on this deal (aside from the continued partnership and strong relationship with a friend in the war on terror), is OUT-SOURCING our national security is only spread by ridiculous posts like THIS one!

If anyone wanted to hit us, they wouldn't need to control one of our ports! A tanker with a newly created Iranian suitcase Nuke sails into New York , hasn't even reached the docks yet - >BOOM< - N.Y. is no longer 'the Big Apple' but rather the 'Big MUSHROOM' (cloud)!

ptsdkid said:

***Sell out to the British? Those ports in question are already solely owned by the British.

Click to expand...

Well no thats wrong... Not sure about all of them but I know they don't own the philly port. They run the logistics, but they don't OWN the port.. Philly holds the paper to the Navy Yard, not the British company that handles the port. This is also probably the case with the other ports.

Calm2Chaos said:

Well no thats wrong... Not sure about all of them but I know they don't own the philly port. They run the logistics, but they don't OWN the port.. Philly holds the paper to the Navy Yard, not the British company that handles the port. This is also probably the case with the other ports.

Click to expand...

Exactly, thus my wording of "'owns' the operating of ".....The foreign goverments/companies do not own any of the ports - they just have the contract/own the companies that run the port.

There has been a theory thrown out as well yesterday that, as in Miami - based on the law suit filed by the Dock Workers' labor Union, the labor union is fighting THIS transaction because the UAE is not a country that deals with Unions. They don't normally and have not in the past worked with Unions. No one should read into what I may be implying because i am not implying anything (like that the UAE maybe hostile to unions - don't know! But like I said, they bought the company to make money and there should be no visible change in the way business is run!).

easyt65 said:

Exactly, thus my wording of "'owns' the operating of ".....The foreign goverments/companies do not own any of the ports - they just have the contract/own the companies that run the port.

There has been a theory thrown out as well yesterday that, as in Miami - based on the law suit filed by the Dock Workers' labor Union, the labor union is fighting THIS transaction because the UAE is not a country that deals with Unions. They don't normally and have not in the past worked with Unions. No one should read into what I may be implying because i am not implying anything (like that the UAE maybe hostile to unions - don't know! But like I said, they bought the company to make money and there should be no visible change in the way business is run!).

Click to expand...

Rendell has already said they won't reisssue the lease when it comes due. (And it's coming due shortly) He stated that they have the right and will exercise it to put out an RFP for the control of the port

No foreign company or country owns any American port. They simply own the operations of certain TERMINALS within a port. That is a huge & significant difference. The security will still be done half-assed by our Coast Guard & customs.

Now, if we could only rally Congress to care this much about our southern border.

easyt65 said:

80% of ports in Los Angeles, California are now, and have been, under the control/'ownership' of foreign companies for quite some time now. Yet, there has been NO public outcry about it until now.

40% of U.S. ports are already, and have been for sme time now, under the control of foreign countries! Yet, there has been NO public outcry about it until now.

Click to expand...

The reason why there has been NO public outcry about it until now is becasue they do not tell the general public these things.

They don't normally tell people because it is no big deal! There is no threat to the U.S. because the foreign companies have no/almost NO impact on the security of our ports or the security of this nation. The ONLY reason this became a big deal is because sveral GOP Senators up for re-election were told by their advisors that people will NOT like this and to go all out against it immediately.

The Senators started a fire and fanned the flames into a wildfire, acting irrationally and irresponsibly by scaring the h@ll out of the Voters into thinking we were out-sourcing the security of this country, which was just flat out a LIE! They wanted to sell the public the idea that they were America's natl. security Watchdogs, looking out for America, and throwing Bush under the Bus as his poll #s dip a little, causing his #s to dip even further by making it look like Bush was compromising our Natl. Security with this deal, which AGAIN, is a LIE!

Now you have Senators contemplating submitting legislation that would block the sale of the UK firm to UAE even if the 45-day investigation proves (again) that this deal is no threat. :shock: THAT bothers me a lot!

If the UK wants to sell their ocmpany to Iran, so be it. We should not be able to stop a private foreign goverment from having the right to sell their company. I would agree that it is the U.S.'s right, then to have a policy where we can decide who we want to give our port operations contracts to. The UK can sell their business to Iran if they want, but the contract the UK had to run those 6 ports is cancelled because it is our policy not to deal with the New Owners, Iran! We can have the right to pick who we give our contracts to, but we should NOT have the right to tell the private UK business who they can and can not sell their business to!

easyt65 said:

They don't normally tell people because it is no big deal!

Click to expand...

Then why use the "No one complained about Britian or any other country running the port" argument?

Ports should not be owned or operated by foriegn entities.

jamesrage said:

Then why use the "No one complained about Britian or any other country running the port" argument?

Ports should not be owned or operated by foriegn entities.

Click to expand...

No one did complain - even those who DID know. This didn't become a big deal until Senators started spreading fear with their BS..and, AGAIN.....

Foreign entities do not OWN our ports or have anythihg to do with our security! As far as them not being allowed to run the operations (by providing U.S. citiznes jobs, because it is Americans on the ports doing all the work), WHO else is gonna do it? There aren't any/nearly enough U.S. Companies who offer this service? Are you going to insist that the U.S.Goverment FORCE private citizens to start up a business of their own and do the work?

Your declarations SOUND real nice, intelligent, and Patriotic, but have very little to do with REALITY!